SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

15 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Osimertinib With or Without Chemotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With EGFR and Concurrent TP53 Mutations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Combination therapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its clinical benefit-risk profile remains a focus of ongoing debate. Identifying patients most likely to derive benefit from such regimens remains an unmet clinical need. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy with osimertinib monotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study conducted at 17 sites in China. Between March 25, 2021, and July 11, 2024, a total of 294 eligible patients with treatment-naive, stage IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 and EGFR-sensitizing mutations were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive osimertinib plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and carboplatin every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy of osimertinib plus pemetrexed; n = 146) or osimertinib monotherapy (n = 148). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Among 294 enrolled patients, the median age was 57 years (range, 26-79 years), and 159 (54.1%) were female. The data cutoff date was November 11, 2025. At a median follow-up of 25.1 months for the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and 26.1 months for the osimertinib monotherapy group, median progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib plus chemotherapy than with osimertinib monotherapy (34.0 vs 15.6 months; difference, 18.4 months [95% CI, 9.9-22.3]; hazard ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32-0.60]; P < .001). This benefit was consistent across prespecified subgroups, including those with brain metastases and L858R mutations. The overall survival data remained immature (30.6% maturity); however, a trend toward overall survival benefit with combination therapy was observed. The incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events was higher in the combination group, with no new safety signal identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, osimertinib plus chemotherapy significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. These findings provided a clinical rationale for individualized combination strategies in the management of patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04695925.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Azacitidine-Venetoclax or Induction Chemotherapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Induction chemotherapy has long been a key component of curative therapy for fit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), despite its frequently severe side effects and substantial health care utilization. For patients who are ineligible for induction chemotherapy, hypomethylating therapy plus venetoclax is the standard treatment owing to its efficacy and side-effect profile. METHODS: In this multicenter, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, previously untreated adults with AML who were eligible for induction chemotherapy to receive either azacitidine plus venetoclax or induction chemotherapy. Patients with core binding factor fusions, mutations in the gene encoding FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), or mutations in the gene encoding nucleophosmin-1 (NPM1; unless the patient was ≥60 years of age) were excluded. The primary end point was event-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 172 patients underwent randomization, with 86 patients assigned to each group. The median age of the patients was 64 years. A total of 72% of the patients had adverse-risk disease according to the European LeukemiaNet 2022 classification. At a median follow-up of 21.9 months, the median event-free survival was 14.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.4 to 24.4) in the azacitidine-venetoclax group, as compared with 6.2 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 10.1) in the induction chemotherapy group, corresponding to a hazard ratio for event or death of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.84; P = 0.002 by the stratified log-rank test). Infection of grade 3 or higher occurred in 28% of the patients (95% CI, 19 to 39) receiving azacitidine-venetoclax and in 41% of those (95% CI, 30 to 52) receiving induction chemotherapy; hemorrhage of grade 3 or higher occurred in 2% (95% CI, 0.3 to 8) and 12% (95% CI, 6 to 20), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2, randomized trial, azacitidine-venetoclax therapy led to significantly longer event-free survival than induction chemotherapy among induction-eligible patients with AML. (Funded by AbbVie and others; PARADIGM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04801797.).

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Addition of High-Dose Vitamin D3 to Standard Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The SOLARIS Randomized Clinical Trial (Alliance A021703).

IMPORTANCE: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, high-dose vitamin D3 added to standard treatment improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with standard-dose vitamin D3 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). OBJECTIVE: To determine if high-dose vitamin D3 added to standard chemotherapy improves outcomes in patients with previously untreated mCRC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolling 455 patients with previously untreated mCRC, conducted in the US through the National Clinical Trials Network from October 2019 to December 2022 (database freeze: July 15, 2024). INTERVENTIONS: mFOLFOX6 (modified FOLFOX6 [5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin]) or FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) plus bevacizumab every 2 weeks with either high-dose vitamin D3 (8000 IU daily × 14 days as loading dose followed by 4000 IU daily) or standard-dose vitamin D3 (400 IU daily) until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was PFS assessed by the unstratified log-rank test. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, and toxicity. Prespecified subgroup analyses of PFS were performed according to known prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 455 randomized patients (median age, 59 years; 181 [40%] female) with median follow-up 20 months, the median PFS for high-dose vitamin D3 (n = 228) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.3-13.3) vs 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.4-12.2) for standard-dose vitamin D3 (n = 227) (1-sided log-rank P = .25). There were no significant differences in objective response rate between high-dose and standard-dose vitamin D3 (51% [95% CI, 44%-58%] vs 44% [95% CI, 37%-50%], respectively; P = .12), or in overall survival (median, 25.6 vs 27.0 months; 1-sided log-rank P = .66). There were no clinically meaningful differences in the most common grade 3 or greater adverse events between the high- and standard-dose groups, including neutropenia (n = 67 [32%] vs n = 62 [30%]) and hypertension (n = 42 [20%] vs n = 49 [23%]) or in incidence of vitamin D-associated toxicities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with previously untreated mCRC, addition of high-dose vitamin D3, vs standard-dose vitamin D3, to standard chemotherapy plus bevacizumab did not improve PFS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04094688.

Aged↗

PubMed2026

The clinical value of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to radiotherapy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have explored the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment for patients undergoing radiotherapy, studies systematically assessing the clinical value of such interventions are lacking. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant RCTs of cancers that received ICIs plus radiotherapy or radiotherapy. Eligible studies were those published in English as of 14 April 2024. Two independent reviewers screened the included studies and extracted relevant data, then selected the random or fixed-effects model based on the I2 statistic. The main outcomes were hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs for objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs). Stratified analysis was performed based on cancer type, ICI type, and the timing of ICI addition. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024551008). RESULTS: 15 RCTs with 7947 patients were included. Pooled HRs were 0.865 (95% CI, 0.730-1.000; I2 = 72.1%) for OS and 0.799 (0.677-0.922; I2 = 82.0%) for PFS in cancer patients. In cancer types, adding immunotherapy to radiotherapy significantly improved patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (OS: 0.544 [0.371-0.717]; PFS: 0.527 [0.438-0.617]) and cervical cancer (OS: 0.722 [0.578-0.867] and PFS: 0.754 [95%CI, 0.621-0.887]). Regarding the ICIs schedule, adjuvant ICI therapy with pooled HRs was 0.742 (0.649-0.834) for OS and 0.638 (0.579-0.697) for PFS. In addition, the pooled ORs for the incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related and immune-related adverse events were 1.227 (1.059-1.421; I2 = 71.9%) and 2.217 (1.743-2.821; I2 = 74.0%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Adding immunotherapy to radiotherapy can provide significant clinical benefits for patients with NSCLC and cervical cancer, and the addition of these ICIs in the adjuvant stage is supported.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of fruquintinib versus ramucirumab in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Aim: Fruquintinib (Fruq), a selective VEGFR 1/2/3 inhibitor, showed a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the Phase III FRUTIGA trial for advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Ramucirumab (RAM), an anti-VEGFR2 antibody, demonstrated efficacy in the RAINBOW-Asia trial. This anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) evaluated Fruq plus paclitaxel versus RAM plus paclitaxel as second-line therapy for G/GEJ adenocarcinoma in the absence of head-to-head trials. Materials & methods: Data from individual patients in the FRUTIGA study (N = 703) and aggregated data from the RAINBOW-Asia study (N = 440) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were balanced using entropy balancing. The placebo plus paclitaxel (PBO + PTX) groups served as the common comparators. The primary outcome was PFS; secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were also compared as an exploratory outcome using an adjusted indirect risk difference. Sensitivity analyses included restricted mean survival time and simulated treatment comparison. Results: After weighting (effective sample size = 564), baseline covariates were balanced. The anchored MAIC demonstrated that Fruq + PTX significantly improved PFS compared with RAM + PTX (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.96; p = 0.0280), corresponding to a 30% reduction in progression risk, with a significant restricted mean survival time benefit of 1.18 months at 20 months (95% CI: 0.08-2.27; p = 0.024). Fruq achieved significantly higher ORR (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.16-2.68; p = 0.008) and DCR (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.33-2.83; p < 0.001). Overall survival was similar (0.97; 95% CI: 0.73-1.30; p = 0.8640). Subgroup analyses showed PFS benefits with Fruq in patients with ECOG PS 1, peritoneal metastases and two or fewer metastatic sites. In sensitivity analysis, the simulated treatment comparison also suggested a PFS benefit for Fruq + PTX (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.32-0.50; p < 0.0001). For any-grade TEAEs, the indirect comparison showed higher adjusted relative incidences of increased bilirubin with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 12.3%; 95% CI: 2.3-22.4%, p < 0.05) and of hypokalemia (RD: 9.0%; 95% CI: 1.5-16.4%, p < 0.05). For grade ≥3 TEAEs, the adjusted relative incidence of decreased body weight was higher with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 2.9%; 95% CI: 0.6-5.2%, p < 0.05). The adjusted relative incidences of increased AST, ALT and hypocalcemia were numerically lower in the fruquintinib group than in the RAM group. Conclusion: This MAIC indicates that Fruq + PTX may be more effective than RAM + PTX in second-line advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma, with potentially improved PFS, ORR and DCR, and similar overall survival. Safety analyses suggested generally comparable safety profiles across the two regimens. Fruq + PTX remains a valuable treatment option, offering important comparative evidence for clinical and health technology assessment decisions. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT07144995.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

An individualized nomogram for predicting progression-free survival in systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma: a multicenter, retrospective, and internally validated study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an individualized nomogram for predicting disease progression risk in systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL). METHODS: Independent predictors of progression-free survival (PFS) were identified using Cox regression in a multicenter retrospective cohort of 109 sALCL patients (2010-2022). These were incorporated into a three-factor nomogram, evaluated via bootstrapped internal validation (1000 resamples), ROC analysis, C-index, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC). RESULTS: A total of 29 PFS events occurred during a median follow-up of 31 months. Multivariable modelling selected serum β2-microglobulin elevation, extranodal disease, and front-line chemotherapy choice (CHOP versus CHOPE or BV+CHP) as autonomous progression drivers. Upon internal bootstrap validation, the nomogram yielded strong prognostic accuracy, achieving AUCs of 0.81, 0.85 and 0.87 for 1-, 3- and 5-year progression-free survival, alongside a corrected C-index of 0.779 (95% CI: 0.699 - 0.861). Calibration plots showed close agreement between predicted and observed outcomes, while DCA confirmed superior net clinical benefit versus conventional IPI or Ann Arbor stratification across multiple decision thresholds. CONCLUSION: This first sALCL-specific nomogram integrates clinical and treatment variables to provide personalized PFS risk estimation. While internally validated, this exploratory, observation-based tool requires external validation and recalibration in prospective cohorts before clinical implementation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

COMBI-I: Long-Term Overall Survival With Spartalizumab Plus Dabrafenib and Trametinib in BRAF V600-Mutant Advanced Melanoma.

The COMBI-I trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02967692) evaluating spartalizumab plus dabrafenib and trametinib (sparta-DabTram, n = 267) versus placebo plus dabrafenib and trametinib (placebo-DabTram, n = 265) for BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma failed to reach its primary end point of progression-free survival at 24 months. This final analysis reports overall survival (OS) during at least 5 years of extended follow-up. At the end of the trial (August 21, 2024), the median duration of follow-up was 76.9 months (range, 73.7-83.3 months). The median OS was 61.5 months (95% CI, 41.6 to not evaluable) for the sparta-DabTram arm and 41.6 months (95% CI, 30.6 to 56.9) for the placebo-DabTram arm (hazard ratio, 0.760 [95% CI, 0.598 to 0.966]). The safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile for sparta-DabTram. The most common treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) was pyrexia (65.9% v 46.2%, respectively, in the two study arms). Grade ≥3 TRAEs were reported in 57.3% and 36.7% of patients in the two arms, respectively. The combination of sparta-DabTram appears to improve OS compared with dabrafenib and trametinib alone in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Validation of the lung immune prognostic index in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: Post hoc analysis of the caspian and IMpower133 phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: The Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) is an inflammation-based biomarker associated with outcomes to immunotherapy across several tumor types. Its prognostic value in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), however, remains insufficiently validated. We aimed to validate the prognostic impact of LIPI in ES-SCLC using data from two phase III trials. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the CASPIAN (NCT03043872) and IMpower133 (NCT02763579) trials were included. LIPI groups were defined as good (dNLR<3 and LDH<ULN), intermediate (dNLR≥3 or LDH≥ULN) and poor (dNLR≥3 and LDH≥ULN). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed across LIPI categories and treatment arms. RESULTS: LIPI was available for 1140 patients (Good: 34%, Intermediate: 49%, Poor: 17%), including 708 treated with chemotherapy-immunotherapy and 432 with chemotherapy alone. Poor LIPI was associated with unfavorable characteristics, including lower albumin levels and higher rate of liver metastases. Median OS was 14.6 months (95%CI: 12.4-15.9) for LIPI Good, 10.9 (10.1-11.5) for Intermediate, and 8.4 (7.1-9.3) for Poor (p < 0.0001). In multivariate models adjusted on gender, age, ECOG, treatment arm and metastatic sites, LIPI remained an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR Poor vs. Good: 1.76, 95%CI: 1.45-2.15, p < 0.001) and PFS (HR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.33-1.90, p < 0.001). Although patients with poor LIPI derived limited benefit from immunotherapy, no significant treatment-LIPI interaction was observed. CONCLUSION: This large post hoc analysis confirms LIPI as a robust and clinically applicable prognostic biomarker in ES-SCLC. Patients with poor LIPI have substantially worse outcomes and limited benefit from immunotherapy, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic strategies in this subgroup.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Pembrolizumab-Chemotherapy Versus Pembrolizumab in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A PD-L1 CPS-Stratified Analysis of Updated KEYNOTE-048 Data.

Based on KEYNOTE-048, pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy are established category 1 first-line treatments for recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1. We compared their efficacy using updated trial data. We analyzed 4-year progression-free survival on next-line therapy (PFS2) and 5-year overall survival (OS) data from KEYNOTE-048 by reconstructing time-to-event data using KMSubtraction. Efficacy was compared in CPS 1-19 and CPS ≥ 20 subgroups using Kaplan-Meier estimates, Cox models, restricted mean survival time (RMST), and landmark analyses. Among 499 patients with CPS ≥ 1, 240 (48.1%) had CPS 1-19 and 259 (51.9%) had CPS ≥ 20. In the CPS 1-19 subgroup, pembrolizumab-chemotherapy showed numerically longer median PFS2 (10.1 vs. 8.0 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-1.06) and OS (12.8 vs. 10.8 months; HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.67-1.15) versus monotherapy, without statistical significance. For CPS ≥ 20 patients, efficacy was comparable between regimens, with similar median PFS2 (11.3 vs. 11.7 months; HR: 0.95) and OS (14.7 vs. 14.9 months; HR: 0.96). RMST and landmark analyses showed an early PFS2 benefit and a trend toward OS benefit with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy in CPS 1-19, with comparable outcomes in CPS ≥ 20. Pembrolizumab-chemotherapy showed a trend toward improved outcomes in the CPS 1-19 subgroup, with comparable efficacy in the CPS ≥ 20 subgroup, supporting a refined first-line strategy: monotherapy for CPS ≥ 20 to minimize toxicity, and combination therapy for CPS 1-19 to potentially enhance disease control.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Assessing time to symptomatic progression, a patient-relevant efficacy endpoint, in the MARIPOSA study in non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In the phase 3 randomized MARIPOSA study, amivantamab and lazertinib combination therapy demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus osimertinib in participants with previously untreated, epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Time to symptomatic progression (TTSP) was introduced to assess clinical worsening and complement endpoints that investigate radiographic disease progression and patient-reported outcomes. TTSP provides an easily interpretable measure of disease-specific symptom worsening to further support patient experience. METHODS: In MARIPOSA, TTSP was quantitatively assessed as a secondary efficacy endpoint and defined as the time from randomization until participants experience disease-specific symptom worsening requiring a clinical intervention or treatment change, or death. To evaluate the impact of amivantamab and lazertinib on TTSP considering its established OS benefit against osimertinib, an exploratory analysis censoring death events was performed. RESULTS: At the final protocol-specified OS analysis (median follow up: 37.8 months), median TTSP was 43.6 months with amivantamab and lazertinib versus 29.3 months with osimertinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.83; p < 0.0001). Amivantamab and lazertinib reduced deaths following a TTSP event compared to osimertinib. A strong correlation between TTSP and PFS or OS was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab and lazertinib significantly delayed TTSP versus osimertinib. TTSP offers a clinician-validated measurement of disease-specific symptom worsening, capturing symptoms perceived by patients that prompt clinical action. TTSP is highly correlated with PFS and OS, providing complementary insights alongside traditional endpoints. TTSP enhances understanding of treatment benefit and supports informed clinical decision-making by integrating patient experience.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

The Addition of Concurrent Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Chemoradiotherapy With Consolidative Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Unresectable Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Following the success of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) combined with consolidative immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in locally advanced tumors, over 30 ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are investigating the potential benefits of adding concurrent ICIs. To investigate the differences in efficacy and safety between adding and not adding concurrent ICIs to CRT followed by consolidative ICIs, a literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, incorporating RCTs comparing CRT combined with consolidative ICIs versus CRT alone, or CRT with both concurrent and consolidative ICIs versus CRT alone. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). To reduce potential bias, an additional mirror-design analysis was performed through network meta-analysis. A total of 13 RCTs comprising 6868 patients and 14 cohort studies comprising 4724 patients were included. While patients treated with CRT and consolidative ICIs demonstrated significantly superior OS and PFS to patients treated with CRT alone in RCTs (HR of OS, 0.743, 95% CI, 0.654-0.843; HR of PFS, 0.674, 95% CI, 0.577-0.786), CRT and concurrent-plus-consolidative ICIs did not improve OS and PFS compared with CRT alone (HR of OS, 0.942, 95% CI, 0.782-1.134; HR of PFS, 0.880, 95% CI, 0.752-1.030). Significant differences were detected in OS (p = 0.038) and PFS (p = 0.017) between CRT combined with consolidative ICIs treatment versus CRT combined with concurrent and consolidative ICIs treatment from RCTs. In conclusion, adding concurrent ICIs may dampen the survival benefits of CRT combined with consolidative ICIs. This evidence informs future RCT design strategies.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Molecular targeted therapy in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer (PROC): a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although single-agent chemotherapy is the most common approach for treating platinum-resistant or refractory ovarian cancer (PROC), there is growing evidence that combining molecular targeted agents with chemotherapy is beneficial, especially for certain patient groups. However, the most effective combination regimen remains elusive. OBJECTIVES: This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to identify the best combination therapy for PROC. METHODS: Relevant studies were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception until October 2024. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs). Statistical analyses were performed using the GEMTC package (1.0-2) and R 4.2.0. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023428414). RESULTS: Our analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 3408) demonstrated that chemotherapy combinations with bevacizumab (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52-0.65), sorafenib (HR = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.93) or adavosertib (HR = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.35-0.90) significantly improved OS and PFS versus chemotherapy alone. Notably, adavosertib + gemcitabine was associated with an increased risk of grade 3-4 AEs (relative risk (RR) = 1.8, 95%CI: 1.3-2.7), but these were generally manageable. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab-based combinations demonstrate consistent benefits across multiple regimens for PROC. Paclitaxel + bevacizumab emerges as the optimal balance of efficacy and safety. Topotecan + sorafenib could be an alternative for patients who are ineligible for anti-angiogenic therapy.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of microwave ablation for the treatment of pulmonary osteosarcoma oligometastases.

PURPOSE: Evaluate efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) for pulmonary osteosarcoma oligometastases. METHODS: Twenty-two patients (median age, 16 years [range, 9-41 years]; 15 male) with pulmonary osteosarcoma oligometastases who underwent MWA from January 2018 to December 2023 were included, with 27 MWA sessions for 36 lung metastases. Technical success and complications were evaluated in all 22 patients, while efficacy and survival were evaluated in 19 patients with 24 MWA sessions in treatment of 32 tumors. Technical success was assessed for each tumor. Local tumor control, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Complications were classified using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all 36 tumors (100.0%). Local tumor progression occurred in five of 32 tumors (15.6%). The estimated local tumor control rates at 12, 24 and 36 months were 96.9%, 86.1% and 81.5%, respectively. No significant difference in local control was found between tumors ≤ 10 mm and > 10 mm (p = .470). Twelve of 19 patients (63.2%) developed new lung metastases outside the ablation area, including one with concurrent newly developed bone metastases and one with recurrence of primary osteosarcoma. The median PFS was 21.5 months. The estimated OS rates at 12, 24 and 60 months were 100.0%, 94.4% and 94.4%, respectively. Major complications occurred in five of 27 sessions (18.5%). CONCLUSIONS: MWA preliminarily demonstrates a high technical success rate, notable local tumor control, promising overall survival and acceptable safety for pulmonary osteosarcoma oligometastases.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2026

Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (HARMONi): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ivonescimab has shown clinical efficacy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC whose disease progressed after third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. METHODS: HARMONi is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 114 cancer centres and hospitals across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years (upper limit: 75 years in Asia) with stage IIIB/IIIC or IV non-squamous EGFR-mutated NSCLC, disease progression after treatment with a third-generation EGFR-TKI, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive voice response system or interactive web response system to receive ivonescimab (20 mg/kg) or placebo plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (target area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by brain metastases status at enrolment and geographical region. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent radiology review committee and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06396065), has completed enrolment, and is ongoing for treatment and follow-up. FINDINGS: From Jan 25, 2022, to Oct 1, 2024, 660 individuals were screened for eligibility; of these, 438 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ivonescimab plus chemotherapy or placebo plus chemotherapy (219 per group). Of enrolled patients, 257 (59%) were female and 181 (41%) were male; 306 (70%) reported race as Asian, and 105 (24%) as White. At a median follow-up of 22·3 months (95% CI 21·5-23·0), 275 progression or death events had occurred in 345 patients (129 events among 172 patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 146 events among 173 patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·5) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·52; 95% CI 0·41-0·66; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 27·7-31·0), 262 deaths occurred in 438 patients (122 in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 140 in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median overall survival was 16·8 months (14·3-19·0) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·0 months (12·8-15·7) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (HR 0·79; 0·62-1·01). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus the placebo plus chemotherapy group were decreased neutrophil count (42 [19%] of 218 vs 36 [17%] of 218), decreased white blood cell count (28 [13%] vs 24 [11%]), decreased platelet count (27 [12%] vs 14 [6%]), and anaemia (22 [10%] vs 27 [12%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 61 (28%) patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 33 (15%) patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four patients (disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and hepatic failure, each in one patient; gastrointestinal haemorrhage and pulmonary embolism in one patient) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and five patients (pneumonitis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, cognitive disorder, and embolic stroke, each in one patient) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI therapy. The clinical benefit and lack of new safety signals of ivonescimab with chemotherapy support the potential for the combination as a new treatment option in this patient population. FUNDING: Summit Therapeutics.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

High-dose radiotherapy in patients with high-risk prostate cancers treated with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (GETUG AFU 18): a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with high-risk prostate cancer, the role of dose-escalated radiotherapy in combination with long-term androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) is controversial, without any demonstrated benefit on cancer-specific or overall survival. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a 10 Gy dose increase, from 70 Gy to 80 Gy, on progression-free survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with high-risk prostate cancer, defined as prostate-specific antigen of 20 ng/mL or more, Gleason score of at least 8, or clinical stage T3-T4, from 25 centres in France. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by minimisation, stratified by centre and previous pelvic lymph node dissection, to receive prostate-targeted dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (80 Gy; 2 Gy per fraction for 8 weeks) or standard-dose external beam radiotherapy (70 Gy; 2 Gy per fraction for 7 weeks), combined with long-term ADT. Neither the participants nor the investigators were masked to the allocated treatment. The primary endpoint was 5-year progression-free survival defined as the time from randomisation to first biochemical (defined as prostate-specific antigen >nadir plus 2 ng/mL) or clinical (ie, local, regional, or metastatic) disease progression, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, with 197 events required. 5-year progression-free survival was the prespecified endpoint, and 10-year progression-free survival was additionally reported (post hoc) in view of the low number of events at 5 years. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00967863, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 6, 2009, and Jan 24, 2013, 505 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled; 250 were assigned to receive dose-escalated radiotherapy (80 Gy) and 255 to receive standard dose radiotherapy (70 Gy). All participants were male and ethnicity data were not collected. At a median follow-up of 9·5 years (IQR 8·5-10·3), 5-year progression-free survival was 91·4% (95% CI 87·0-94·4) in the dose-escalation group versus 88·1% (83·2-91·6) in the control group, and 10-year progression-free survival was 83·6% (77·8-88·0) versus 72·2% (65·3-78·0; stratified HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·40-0·78, p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events assessed at 6 months (acute toxicity) were observed in 60 (24%) of patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 (25%) in the control group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were sexual disorders (28 [11%] in the dose-escalation group vs 20 [8%] in the control group) and bladder or urethra disorders (12 [5%] vs 19 [8%]). Adverse events assessed at 5 years (late toxicity) occurred in 118 (70%) of 168 in the dose-escalation group and 122 (73%) of 168 in the control group; grade 3 or worse late toxicities occurred in 19 (8%) participants in the dose-escalated radiotherapy group versus 17 (7%) participants in the control group. The most common late grade 3 adverse event was bladder or urethra disorders (seven [4%] vs three [2%], respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in nine (4%) patients in the dose escalation group and nine (4%) in the control group; none were considered to be treatment related. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: For patients with high-risk prostate cancer, radiotherapy at a total dose of 80 Gy, in combination with long-term ADT, improved progression-free survival and could be a potential option in this situation. However, given the low number of events, further research is needed to consolidate and confirm the benefit in dose-escalation in prostate cancer-specific survival and overall survival. FUNDING: French National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca.

Aged↗